Development of septic shock and prognostic assessment in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease outside Wuhan, China.

BACKGROUND: The study aims to illustrate the clinical characteristics and development of septic shock in intensive care unit (ICU) patients confirmed with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, and to perform a comprehensive analysis of the association between septic shock and clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). METHODS: Patients confirmed with SARS-CoV-2 infection, who were admitted to the ICU of the Third People's Hospital of Shenzhen from January 1 to February 7, 2020, were enrolled. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were compared between patients with and without septic shock. RESULTS: In this study, 35 critically ill patients with COVID-19 were included. Among them, the median age was 64 years (interquartile range [IQR] 59-67 years), and 10 (28.4%) patients were female. The median ICU length of stay was 16 days (IQR 8-23 days). Three (8.6%) patients died during hospitalization. Nine (25.7%) patients developed septic shock in the ICU, and these patients had a significantly higher incidence of organ dysfunction and a worse prognosis than patients without septic shock. CONCLUSIONS: Septic shock is associated with a poor outcome in critically ill COVID-19 patients and is one of the hallmarks of the severity of patients receiving ICU care. A dysregulated immune response, uncontrolled inflammation, and coagulation disorders are strongly associated with the development and progression of COVID-19-related septic shock.

Severe COVID-19-associated sepsis is different from classical sepsis induced by pulmonary infection with carbapenem-resistant klebsiella pneumonia (CrKP).

PURPOSE: COVID-19 is also referred to as a typical viral septic pulmonary infection by 2019-nCoV. However, little is known regarding its characteristics in terms of systemic inflammation and organ injury, especially compared with classical bacterial sepsis. This article aims to investigate the clinical characteristics and prognosis between COVID-19-associated sepsis and classic bacterial-induced sepsis. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, septic patients with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU) of a government-designed therapy center in Shenzhen, China between January 14, 2020 and March 10, 2020, and septic patients induced by carbapenem-resistant klebsiella pneumonia (CrKP) admitted to the ICU of the Second People's Hospital of Shenzhen, China between January 1, 2014 and October 30, 2019 were enrolled. Demographic and clinical parameters including comorbidities, critical illness scores, treatment, and laboratory data, as well as prognosis were compared between the two groups. Risk factors for mortality and survival rate were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression and survival curve, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 107 patients with COVID-19 and 63 patients with CrKP were enrolled. A direct comparison between the two groups demonstrated more serious degrees of primary lung injury following 2019-nCoV infection (indicated by lower PaO2/FiO2), but milder systemic inflammatory response, lower sequential organ failure assessment score and better functions of the organs like heart, liver, kidney, coagulation, and circulation. However, the acquired immunosuppression presented in COVID-19 patients was more severe, which presented as lower lymphocyte counts (0.8×109/L vs. 0.9×109/L). Moreover, the proportion of COVID-19 patients treated with corticosteroid therapy and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was larger compared with CrKP patients (78.5% vs. 38.1% and 6.5% vs. 0, respectively) who required less invasive mechanical ventilation (31.6% vs. 54.0%). The incidence of hospitalized mortality and length of ICU stay and total hospital stay were also lower or shorter in viral sepsis (12.1% vs. 39.7%, 6.5 days vs. 23.0 days and 21.0 days vs. 33.0 days, respectively) (all p < 0.001). Similar results were obtained after being adjusted by age, gender, comorbidity and PaO2/FiO2. Lymphocytopenia and high acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II scores were common risk factors for in-hospital death. While the death cases of COVID-19 sepsis mostly occurred at the later stages of patients' hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Critical COVID-19 shares clinical characteristics with classical bacterial sepsis, but the degree of systemic inflammatory response, secondary organ damage and mortality rate are less severe. However, following 2019-nCoV infection, the level of immunosuppression may be increased and thus induce in more death at the later stage of patients' hospitalstay.

Severe COVID-19-associated sepsis is different from classical sepsis induced by pulmonary infection with carbapenem-resistant klebsiella pneumonia (CrKP)

Purpose COVID-19 is also referred to as a typical viral septic pulmonary infection by 2019-nCoV. However, little is known regarding its characteristics in terms of systemic inflammation and organ injury, especially compared with classical bacterial sepsis. This article aims to learn the clinical characteristics and prognosis between COVID-19-associated sepsis and classic bacterial-induced sepsis. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, septic patients with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU) of a government-designed therapy center in Shenzhen, China between Jan 14, 2020 and Mar 10, 2020, and septic patients induced by carbapenem-resistant klebsiella pneumonia (CrKP) admitted at the ICU of the Second People’s Hospital of Shenzhen, China between Jan 1, 2014 and Oct 30, 2019, were enrolled. Demographic & clinical parameters including comorbidities, critical illness scores, treatment, and laboratory data, as well as prognosis were compared between the two groups. Risk factors for mortality and survival rate were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression and survival curve. Results A total of 107 patients with COVID-19 and 63 patients with CrKP were enrolled. A direct comparison between the two groups demonstrated more serious degrees of primary lung injury following 2019-nCoV infection (indicated by lower PaO2/FiO2) but milder systemic inflammatory response, lower sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score and better functions of the organs like heart, liver, kidney, coagulation, and circulation. However, the acquired immunosuppression presented in COVID-19 patients was more severe, which presented as lower lymphocyte counts. Moreover, the proportion of COVID-19 patients treated with corticosteroid therapy and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was larger compared with CrKP patients who required less invasive mechanical ventilation. The incidence of hospitalized mortality and length of ICU stay and total hospital stay were also lower or shorter in viral sepsis. Similar results were obtained after being adjusted by age, gender, comorbidity and PaO2/FiO2. Lymphocytopenia and high acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACH II) scores were common risk factors for in-hospital death. While the death cases of COVID-19 sepsis mostly occurred at the later stages of patients’ hospital stay. Conclusion Critical COVID-19 shares clinical characteristics with classical bacterial sepsis, but the degree of systemic inflammatory response, secondary organ damage and mortality rate are less severe. However, following 2019-nCoV infection, the level of immunosuppression may be increased and thus induce in more death at the later stage of patients’ hospital stay.

Persistent lymphopenia after diagnosis of COVID-19 predicts acute respiratory distress syndrome: A retrospective cohort study

Background: Lymphopenia is a marker of immunosuppression after severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) which is characterized by acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). This study aimed to evaluate the relationships between persistent lymphopenia and ARDS. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of 125 patients with COVID-19 admitted to government-designated treatment center between 14 January 2020, and 20 March 2020 was conducted. We recorded all complete blood cell counts during the day 0th, 3rd, and 7th following the diagnosis of COVID-19. Patients were grouped based on the depression of the lymphocyte cell count, their return, or their failure to normal. The primary outcome was the occurrence of ARDS, and secondary outcomes included developing vital organ dysfunction and hospital lengths of stay. Results: 17.6% (22/125) patients developed ARDS. The lymphocyte counts with ARDS and non-ARDS were 0.94 × 109/L, 1.20 × 109/L at admission, respectively (p = 0.02). On the 3rd and 7th day, the median of lymphocyte count in ARDS was significantly lower than that of non-ARDS. Multivariable logistic regression, which was adjusting for potentially confounding factors (including age, comorbidities, and APACHE II score), showed that persistent lymphopenia within the 7th day was independently associated with ARDS (OR, 3.94 [95% CI, 1.26–12.33, p = 0.018). Further, patients with persistent lymphopenia had longer hospital lengths of stay (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The results showed persistent lymphopenia predicted ARDS after COVID-19. Further studies are needed to investigate whether immunostimulation of lymphocytes within 1 week can reduce ARDS occurrence in patients with COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of European Journal of Inflammation (Sage Publications, Ltd.) is the property of Sage Publications, Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Clinical diagnosis of severe COVID-19: A derivation and validation of a prediction rule.

BACKGROUND: The widespread coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to high morbidity and mortality. Therefore, early risk identification of critically ill patients remains crucial. AIM: To develop predictive rules at the time of admission to identify COVID-19 patients who might require intensive care unit (ICU) care. METHODS: This retrospective study included a total of 361 patients with confirmed COVID-19 by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction between January 19, 2020, and March 14, 2020 in Shenzhen Third People's Hospital. Multivariate logistic regression was applied to develop the predictive model. The performance of the predictive model was externally validated and evaluated based on a dataset involving 126 patients from the Wuhan Asia General Hospital between December 2019 and March 2020, by area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC), goodness-of-fit and the performance matrix including the sensitivity, specificity, and precision. A nomogram was also used to visualize the model. RESULTS: Among the patients in the derivation and validation datasets, 38 and 9 participants (10.5% and 2.54%, respectively) developed severe COVID-19, respectively. In univariate analysis, 21 parameters such as age, sex (male), smoker, body mass index (BMI), time from onset to admission (> 5 d), asthenia, dry cough, expectoration, shortness of breath, asthenia, and Rox index < 18 (pulse oxygen saturation, SpO2)/(FiO2 × respiratory rate, RR) showed positive correlations with severe COVID-19. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, only six parameters including BMI [odds ratio (OR) 3.939; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.409-11.015; P = 0.009], time from onset to admission (≥ 5 d) (OR 7.107; 95%CI: 1.449-34.849; P = 0.016), fever (OR 6.794; 95%CI: 1.401-32.951; P = 0.017), Charlson index (OR 2.917; 95%CI: 1.279-6.654; P = 0.011), PaO2/FiO2 ratio (OR 17.570; 95%CI: 1.117-276.383; P = 0.041), and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (OR 3.574; 95%CI: 1.048-12.191; P = 0.042) were found to be independent predictors of COVID-19. These factors were found to be significant risk factors for severe patients confirmed with COVID-19. The AUROC was 0.941 (95%CI: 0.901-0.981) and 0.936 (95%CI: 0.886-0.987) in both datasets. The calibration properties were good. CONCLUSION: The proposed predictive model had great potential in severity prediction of COVID-19 in the ICU. It assisted the ICU clinicians in making timely decisions for the target population.

Thymosin α1 therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19: A multicenter retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 characterized by refractory hypoxemia increases patient mortality because of immunosuppression effects. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of immunomodulatory with thymosin α1 for critical COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective cohort study was performed in 8 government-designated treatment centers for COVID-19 patients in China from Dec. 2019 to Mar. 2020. Thymosin α1 was administrated with 1.6 mg qd or q12 h for >5 days. The primary outcomes were the 28-day and 60-day mortality, the secondary outcomes were hospital length of stay and the total duration of the disease. Subgroup analysis was carried out according to clinical classification. RESULTS: Of the 334 enrolled COVID-19 patients, 42 (12.6%) died within 28 days, and 55 (16.5%) died within 60 days of hospitalization. There was a significant difference in the 28-day mortality between the thymosin α1 and non-thymosin α1-treated groups in adjusted model (P = 0.016), without obvious differences in the 60-day mortality and survival time in the overall cohort (P > 0.05). In the subgroup analysis, it was found that thymosin α1 therapy significantly reduced 28-day mortality (Hazards Ratios HR, 0.11, 95% confidence interval CI 0.02-0.63, P=0.013) via improvement of Pa02/FiO2 (P = 0.036) and prolonged the hospital length of stay (P = 0.024) as well as the total duration of the disease (P=0.001) in the critical type patients, especially those aged over 64 years, with white blood cell >6.8×109/L, neutrophil >5.3×109/L, lymphocyte < 0.73 × 109/L, PaO2/FiO2 < 196, SOFA > 3, and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II > 7. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that treatment with thymosin α1 can markedly decrease 28-day mortality and attenuate acute lung injury in critical type COVID-19 patients.

The Clinical Features and Prognostic Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 Infection-Induced Sepsis Among COVID-19 Patients in Shenzhen, China.

Background: The outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) that began in December 2019 has posed a great threat to human health and caused a significant loss of life. In Shenzhen, 465 patients were confirmed to have COVID-19 as of August 31, 2020. In the present study, we aimed to describe the clinical characteristics of COVID-19 patients in Shenzhen and identify risk factors for the development of viral sepsis. Methods: In this retrospective study, patients who were confirmed to have a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and were admitted to the Third People's Hospital of Shenzhen from January 11 to April 27, 2020 were included in the cohort. Clinical data were extracted and followed up to May 10, 2020, by using predesigned data collection forms. Results: A total of 422 hospitalized COVID-19 patients were enrolled in this study, including 97 (23%) patients with viral sepsis at hospital admission and 325 (77%) non-septic patients. Patients with sepsis were much older than those without sepsis (57 vs. 43 years, P < 0.001) and presented with more comorbidities. Septic patients showed multiple organ dysfunction and significant abnormalities in immune- and inflammation-related biomarkers, and had poorer outcomes when compared to those without sepsis. Increased levels of interleukin-6, blood urea nitrogen, and creatine kinase were associated with the development of SARS-CoV-2-induced sepsis, and an elevated production of interleukin-6 was found to be an independent risk factor for the progression to critical illness among septic COVID-19 patients. Conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 infection-induced sepsis is critically involved in the severity and prognosis of COVID-19 patients by characterizing both aberrant immune response and uncontrolled inflammation. The development of sepsis might contribute to multiple organ dysfunction and poor outcomes in COVID-19 patients during hospitalization.

Clinical efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulin therapy in critical ill patients with COVID-19: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak is a major challenge all over the world, without acknowledged treatment. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) has been recommended to treat critical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in a few reviews, but the clinical study evidence on its efficacy in COVID-19 patients was lacking. METHODS: 325 patients with laboratory-confirmed critical COVID-19 were enrolled from 4 government-designated COVID-19 treatment centres in southern China from December 2019 to March 2020. The primary outcomes were 28- and 60-day mortality, and the secondary outcomes were the total length of in-hospital and the total duration of the disease. Subgroup analysis was carried out according to clinical classification of COVID-19, IVIG dosage and timing. RESULTS: In the enrolled 325 patients, 174 cases used IVIG and 151 cases did not. The 28-day mortality was improved with IVIG after adjusting confounding in overall cohort (P = 0.0014), and the in-hospital and the total duration of disease were longer in the IVIG group (P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed that only in patients with critical type, IVIG could significantly reduce the 28-day mortality, decrease the inflammatory response and improve some organ functions (all P < 0.05); the application of IVIG in the early stage (admission ≤ 7 days) with a high dose (> 15 g per day) exhibited significant reduction in 60-day mortality in the critical-type patients. CONCLUSION: Early administration of IVIG with high dose improves the prognosis of critical-type patients with COVID-19. This study provides important information on clinical application of IVIG in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection, including patient selection and administration dosage and timing.

Comparison of clinical laboratory tests between bacterial sepsis and SARS-CoV-2-associated viral sepsis.

Sepsis is a life-threatening condition that is characterized by multiple organ dysfunction due to abnormal host response to various pathogens, like bacteria, fungi and virus. The differences between viral and bacterial sepsis are indeed of great significance to deepen the understanding of the pathogenesis of sepsis, especially under pandemics of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) associated coagulopathy and its impact on outcomes in Shenzhen, China: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Early detection of suspected critical patients infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is very important for the treatment of patients. This study aimed to investigate the role of COVID-19 associated coagulopathy (CAC) to preview and triage. METHODS AND RESULTS: A cohort study was designed from government designated COVID-19 treatment center. CAC was defined as International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) score ≥2. Data from 117 patients COVID-19 were reviewed on admission. The primary and secondary outcomes were admission to Intensive Care Unit (ICU), the use of mechanical ventilation, vital organ dysfunction, discharges of days 14, 21 and 28 from admission and hospital mortality. Among them, admission to ICU was increased progressively from 16.1% in patients with non-CAC to 42.6% in patients with CAC (P < 0.01). Likely, invasive ventilation and noninvasive ventilation were increased from 1.8%, 21.4% in patients with non-CAC to 21.3%, 52.5% in patients with CAC, respectively (P < 0.01). The incidences of acute hepatic injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome in non-CAC and CAC were 28.6% vs. 62.3%, 8.9% vs. 27.9%, respectively (P < 0.01). The discharges of days 14, 21 and 28 from admission were more in non-CAC than those of CAC (P < 0.05). Multiple logistic regression results showed that ISTH score ≥2 was obviously associated with the admission to ICU (OR 4.07, 95% CI 1.47-11.25 P = 0.007) and the use of mechanical ventilation (OR 5.54, 95% CI 2.01-15.28 P = 0.001) in patients with COVID-19. CONCLUSION: All results show ISTH score ≥2 is an important indicator to preview and triage for COVID-19 patients.